01. Torn By The Fox Of The Crescent Moon02. There Is A Serpent Coming03. From The Zodiacal Light04. Even Hell Has Its Heroes05. Rooks Across The Gates06. Badgers Bane [vinyl bonus]

Earth require little introduction for fans of drone. Their debut album has become so legendary in the scene that even Stephen O'Malley (a legend in his own right) was inspired to start a project named after one of its tracks. However, the band demonstrated soon after that they were never content to sit in this one style, and have been consistently reinventing themselves ever since. 2014's Primitive And Deadly only continues this trend, further proving that Earth aren't running out of the tricks in their hat anytime soon.

Coming off of the psychedelic dabblings of their past few albums, Primitive And Deadly sees Earth retaining some of the qualities from each, but with a much thicker, denser delivery, "Torn By The Fox Of The Crescent Moon" easily being one of the heaviest tracks the band have done in years. A very strong bluesy vibe runs throughout the album as well, especially on "Even Hell Has Its Heroes," which really helps to create a mood reminiscent of classic psychedelic rock. The guitar and bass hold down a steady rhythm, while the guitar, taking the lead role, floats freely wherever it pleases, in a very simplistic delivery that nonetheless suggests some kind of grander structure lurking within.

But of course, perhaps the most notable feature of Primitive And Deadly is the presence of some (highly talented) guest vocalists! Mark Lanegan (ex Queens Of The Stone Age) lends his pipes to "Rooks Across The Gates" and (my personal favorite) "There Is A Serpent Coming." Once again, on the latter track especially, this bluesy feeling has a big presence, with Lanegan's vocals having a very deep, old time feel to them, almost as though they're telling a story. Meanwhile, Rabia Qazi belts it out the beautiful "From The Zodiacal Light," sounding strangely similar to Jex Thoth's Jessica Bowen and having the sort of relaxed tone that perfectly complements the music.

With Primitive And Deadly, Earth have proven themselves capable (if they hadn't already) of something not many bands can accomplish: eight albums, none of which suck or can be called shit. Always inventive and never satisfied with staying in one place with their sound, Dylan Carlson and company have created a multitude of personalities for themselves that are always enjoyable from one perspective or another. Primitive And Deadly is yet another evolution in this process, seemingly taking the more mellow nature of the previous three albums and making it heavier and more structured, turning it into a bluesy psychedelic rock of sorts. If you've been a loyal fan of Earth for all these years, or just a big psychedelic fan in general, don't pass this one up.

Hell yeah man, totally adds a new dimension to the music. When I saw that note on their Bandcamp page before listening that said they would "transform the traditionally free ranging meditations of Earth into something approaching traditional pop structures" I was afraid the guest vocals would make the music sound less like Earth and more like typical pop rock, but I was pleasantly proven wrong!

Well it depends on what you're looking for, really, but I think a guy of your tastes will definitely score it around 8 material. I think this might be a good relief for people who didn't enjoy the AODDOL albums too much, as, like I said, it's a little heavier and more focused with its delivery.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say none of their material sucks or can be called shit. I haven't listened to this yet but I personally consider Earth a very inconsistent band that has recently done little to impress. The Angels and Demons albums felt dull, aimless, and ultimately anticlimactic. On the other hand, an album like The Bees managed to perfectly capture the Old West/small town/desert vibes.

I prefer Earth in their storytelling mode - when the music acts as a narrative rather than simply background noise. How this album was written, either as a soundtrack or a lullaby, will determine whether or not I enjoy it.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say none of their material sucks or can be called shit. I haven't listened to this yet but I personally consider Earth a very inconsistent band that has recently done little to impress. The Angels and Demons albums felt dull, aimless, and ultimately anticlimactic. On the other hand, an album like The Bees managed to perfectly capture the Old West/small town/desert vibes.

I prefer Earth in their storytelling mode - when the music acts as a narrative rather than simply background noise. How this album was written, either as a soundtrack or a lullaby, will determine whether or not I enjoy it.

Opinions, opinions
Well as I said here, the tracks that Mark Lanegan guests on really have a bluesy vibe that feels like an old grandpa sitting on his porch telling stories while playing guitar, so I think you'll find it decent at the very least.

What Earth albums? Well, I'm sure some people might say that some are dismissible, but I enjoy all of them personally. I'd say to just start with the debut (Earth 2: Special Low Frequency Version) and work your way forward from there. The band are known as drone pioneers, but that's really their only album that I'd say is pure drone, the others either blend some other influences in or just aren't drone at all.

What Earth albums? Well, I'm sure some people might say that some are dismissible, but I enjoy all of them personally. I'd say to just start with the debut (Earth 2: Special Low Frequency Version) and work your way forward from there. The band are known as drone pioneers, but that's really their only album that I'd say is pure drone, the others either blend some other influences in or just aren't drone at all.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say none of their material sucks or can be called shit. I haven't listened to this yet but I personally consider Earth a very inconsistent band that has recently done little to impress. The Angels and Demons albums felt dull, aimless, and ultimately anticlimactic. On the other hand, an album like The Bees managed to perfectly capture the Old West/small town/desert vibes.

I prefer Earth in their storytelling mode - when the music acts as a narrative rather than simply background noise. How this album was written, either as a soundtrack or a lullaby, will determine whether or not I enjoy it.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say Earth's music is shit.

Even when Earth is "off" and is just background noise it's hardly offensive. I can definitely see and understand someone getting bored by it, but to call it shit? It's funny that you find them inconsistent because I think the exact opposite

Written by Boxcar Willy on 31.08.2014 at 16:35I think it's a bit of a stretch to say Earth's music is shit.

Even when Earth is "off" and is just background noise it's hardly offensive. I can definitely see and understand someone getting bored by it, but to call it shit? It's funny that you find them inconsistent because I think the exact opposite

Opinions r weird man.

I didn't say they were shit - all I said was that it's a stretch to say their albums "can't be called shit" or that you "can't say that they suck". At that point it seems like the reviewer is separating opinion from fact.

I don't find any of their material offensively bad, because when they're "off" as you call it, they're dismissible. I know how much you and Che like these guys so any negative comments will be met with "opinions lol" but if you're going to make bold claims about a band's quality and consistency, you might want to keep in mind they released duds like the Angels and Demons albums.

All I said was that it's a stretch to say their albums "can't be called shit" or that you "can't say that they suck". At that point it seems like the reviewer is separating opinion from fact... if you're going to make bold claims about a band's quality and consistency, you might want to keep in mind they released duds like the Angels and Demons albums.

Well, a review is a personal opinion above all, is it not? Those "duds" you speak of (once again, an opinion) were actually pretty well composed and immersive to me, so when I say I don't really think any of the band's releases can be said to suck, I hope that'll be taken more as a personal opinion than as me presenting some sort of objective fact.

Written by Apothecary on 03.09.2014 at 23:59Well, a review is a personal opinion above all, is it not? Those "duds" you speak of (once again, an opinion) were actually pretty well composed and immersive to me, so when I say I don't really think any of the band's releases can be said to suck, I hope that'll be taken more as a personal opinion than as me presenting some sort of objective fact.

Reviews can be both opinionated and factual. "...Earth have proven themselves capable (if they hadn't already) of something not many bands can accomplish: eight albums, none of which suck or can be called shit." That sounds more like you're trying to pass off opinion as fact to me.

"...Earth have proven themselves capable (if they hadn't already) of something not many bands can accomplish: eight albums, none of which suck or can be called shit." That sounds more like you're trying to pass off opinion as fact to me.

I recall Doc beginning his review of the latest High On Fire album with a similar sentence. It's simply my way of stating that to me the band have been incredibly consistent and inventive all across their discog, no more, no less. Of course, interpretation of what I say will ultimately fall upon the reader, and that's something really beyond my control.

I didn't say they were shit - all I said was that it's a stretch to say their albums "can't be called shit" or that you "can't say that they suck". At that point it seems like the reviewer is separating opinion from fact.

I guess it's that Earth has never really made an album which has violently divided people or inspired abject hatred. Even their shift from drone to post-rock didn't seem to bother people too much and while the two after Bees were somewhat lukewarmly received I guess saying they "suck" would be a stretch for anyone.

Written by Mr. Doctor on 05.09.2014 at 13:50That only happens if the reader himself thinks that reviews are something more than an opinion. Which is obviously not true.

Evidently my interpretation of the review isn't one others share, but I think it's a cop-out when people throw out the "opinion" word to defend what appears to be a factual statement. Reviews aren't necessarily purely opinionated.

Not that this is what we should be discussing in this thread - I didn't even think bringing it up would bother anyone.